Reply

Sara you have highlighted a classic example of one of the fallacies of logic – the false dilemma:

Climate change occurs – it must be caused by CO2 – we must therefore shut down the fossil fuel industry – this is an economic problem.

Is that really the case? No one argues with step one, climate changes, it has done for four and a half billion years but there is massive debate as to what causes this and what is a main driver.

There is also little argument that CO2 has some greenhouse effect but again there is massive debate as to how much and whether it can drive climate and what other feedbacks does nature make to added CO2. Scientists still have little understanding of all the earth’s systems and that of the surrounding universe to be positive about anything.

We do know that the IPCC models have consistently overestimated the effect of CO2 as there has been no significant global temperature increase for well over a decade although CO2 has increased.

It may be that we cannot stop temperature rise even if CO2 decreases and it may be that the earth could even start cooling. However from present indications there is no impending catastrophes even though these have been predicted for a very long time. It may be therefore a question of adapting to climate change until we have more indicative evidence as to what is its main driver.

Your premise without a false dilemma could therefore be:

Climate change occurs – what is the main driver? – do humans have an impact? If so, how much impact? Will this impact have a significant effect and if so over what time period? How do we change that impact and how much time do we have to act?

My personal opinion is that we have oodles time but we will have a better idea within 20 years. We have to eliminate the CO2 question regardless as we must replace fossil fuel because we have limited supplies. Whether this “solves” climate change remains to be seen.